You are on page 1of 66

A STUDY OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNING STRATEGIES OF

ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PUPILS AT SDN 1 BENGKULU

THESIS

By
YAIMIN
A1B001038

ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM


DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGES AND ARTS
FACULTY OF TEACHERS’ TRAINING AND EDUCATION
UNIVERSITAS BENGKULU
2006
A STUDY OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNING STRATEGIES OF
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PUPILS AT SDN 1 BENGKULU

THESIS

Presented as a Partial Requirements for “Sarjana Degree”


In English Language Education

By
YAIMIN
A1B001038

ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM


DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGES AND ARTS
FACULTY OF TEACHERS’ TRAINING AND EDUCATION
UNIVERSITAS BENGKULU
2006
MOTTO AND DEDICATION

Motto:
™ Nothing worth while comes easily.
(Oprah Winfrey)

™ I can do everything if I want


(Yaimin)

™ Hidup adalah perjuangan.


(Yaimin)

™ Bertahan, terus bertarung, bangkit, dan menang!


(D. Mc Arthur)

This Thesis is dedicated to:


™ My beloved parents (Sumiran and Yomi), thanks for giving me pray
and all your support.
™ My beloved wife (Septy Ferawaty), thanks for your motivation and
pray, keep your love beside me.
™ My lovely brave son (Arya Adha Pratama).
™ My mother in law (Hawaliah), thanks for your big support.
™ My beloved Uncle/aunt (Kasmo/Samilah), You teach me how life is.
In every my step you show the best way for me. Withous you I’ll
never understanding the meaning of success and happiness.
™ My Big family in Bengkulu (Topan, Elva, Aan, Mas Warno and
Mbak Susi, Etek Pantas, Cici Mega, Lek Kasio, Mas Muri, etc),
thanks for your kindness.
™ My close friends (Yulianto, Hamdan and Budiono), I miss you all.
™ My Beloved friends (Edward and Fan), Thanks for your support.
™ All my friends in English Language Education Study Program at
“2001” Academic year and my Almamater.

5
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Many People had been willingly shared their happy laughter and painful tears in
completing this research. On this very special occasion, allow me to express my
greatest gratitude to Mr. Bambang Suwarno and Mr. Arasuli for all their valuable
comments, ideas, suggestions, and critics starting from the very early stage to the
final settlement of this research. To my extent, the following individuals can be
regarded as the “noble heroes” for had been giving me all their best efforts in helping
me completing my research. Allow me to express my greatest gratitude to Mrs. Hilda
Puspita, Mr. Mulyadi, Mr. Rudi Afriazi, Mr. Barnabas Sembiring, Mrs. Kasmaini,
Mr. Suparman, Mr. Badeni, and all the lecturers English Study Program and all the
staff of FKIP UNIB. I also owed my self a great debt to the following kindhearted
individuals: Beloved brother Edward Ridwan, Fan Hera, Andesvan Gumay, Eki
Saputra, Robert Manujung, and the “2001 Golden Generation” of English Language
Education Study Program. Above all, this research is dedicated to all the teachers and
the pupils of SDN 1 Bengkulu. Allow me also to deliver my greatest gratitude to Mr.
Astan Pahlivi and all the crew of Rajawali Room of Rumah Sakit Jiwa Daerah
Bengkulu. I also owe a great deal from my whole families and relatives: my close
friends: Yulianto and Hamdan; my lovely cousin: Suwarno; my brothers and sister:
Aan, Topan, and Elva; my mother in law: Hawaliah; my uncle and aunt: Kasmo and
Samilah; my lovely brave son: Arya Adha Pratama; my beautiful wife: Septy
Ferawaty, And last but not least, I must declare that this research can never be
completed without full support from my father, Sumiran and my mother, Yomi.

6
CONTENTS

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background ................................................................................................. 1
1.2 The formulation of Problem......................................................................... 4
1.3 The Research Objectives ............................................................................. 4
1.4 Significances of the Research ..................................................................... 4
1.5 The Limitation of the Research ................................................................... 4
1.6 Operational Definition ................................................................................ 4

CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW


2.1 Learning ...................................................................................................... 6
2.2 Learning Strategies ...................................................................................... 7
Memory Strategy ......................................................................................... 8
Cognitive Strategy ....................................................................................... 9
Compensation Strategy ............................................................................... 10
Metacognitive Strategy ............................................................................... 11
Affective Strategy ....................................................................................... 12
Social Strategy ............................................................................................ 13
2.3 Related Studies ............................................................................................ 14

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY


3.1 Research Design .......................................................................................... 15
3.2 Population and Sample ................................................................................ 15
3.2.1 Population ......................................................................................... 15
3.2.2 Sample ............................................................................................... 16
3.3 The Data Collection .................................................................................... 16
3.3.1 The Research Instrument ................................................................... 16
3.3.2 Construction of the Questionnaire .................................................... 17
3.3.3 Validity .............................................................................................. 17
3.3.4 Reliability .......................................................................................... 18
3.4 Data Analysis Techniques ........................................................................... 19

CHAPTER IV RESULT AND DISCUSSION


4.1 Result .......................................................................................................... 22
4.1.1 Cognitive Strategy ............................................................................. 23
4.1.2 Metacognitive Strategy ..................................................................... 25
4.1.3 Affective Strategy ............................................................................. 27
4.1.4 Memory Strategy ............................................................................... 29

7
4.1.5 Social Strategy .................................................................................. 31
4.1.6 Compensation Strategy ..................................................................... 33
4.2 Discussions .................................................................................................. 35

CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION


5.1 Conclusions ................................................................................................. 38
5.2 Suggestions ................................................................................................. 39

References
Appendices

8
List of Table

Table 1 The list of Related Studies ................................................................... 14


Table 2 The Data Base of Pupils of SDN 1 Bengkulu ..................................... 15
Table 3 The Likert Scale ................................................................................... 17
Table 4 The Classifications of Language Learning Strategies .......................... 21
Table 5 The Total Average of Cognitive Strategy ............................................ 23
Table 6 The Total Average of Metacognitive Strategy ..................................... 25
Table 7 The Total Average of Affective Strategy ............................................. 27
Table 8 The Total Average of Memory Strategy .............................................. 29
Table 9 The Total Average of Social Strategy .................................................. 32
Table 10 The Total Average of Compensation Strategy .................................... 33

9
List of Figure

Figure 1 Diagram of the Memory Strategy ....................................................... 8


Figure 2 Diagram of the Cognitive Strategy ..................................................... 9
Figure 3 Diagram of the Compensation Strategy .............................................. 10
Figure 4 Diagram of the Metacognitive Strategy .............................................. 11
Figure 5 Diagram of the Affective Strategy ...................................................... 12
Figure 6 Diagram of the Social Strategy ........................................................... 13

10
List of Chart

Chart 1 The General Profiles of Learning Strategies ....................................... 22

11
ABSTRACT

Yaimin, 2006, A Study of Language Learning Strategies of Elementary School


Pupils at SDN 1 Bengkulu

The objective of this research was to investigate the language learning strategies
employed by the pupils of SDN 1 Bengkulu in learning English. The population of
this research was all the 238 pupils of SDN 1 Bengkulu. The sample of this research
was the 25% of the entire population, which were 72 pupils. This research used
questionnaires as its instrument. The result of this research showed that, in general,
the pupils employed cognitive in learning English with the highest total average of
3.50. The other strategies employed were the metacognitive strategy, affective
strategy, the memory strategy, the social strategy, and the compensation strategy.
There were, however, some interesting findings on each category: a) on cognitive
strategy category, the majority of the respondents agreed that they learned English
well by the two following methods: formally practicing with sounds and writing
systems, analyzing expressions, and translating; b) on metacognitive strategy, most
respondents agreed that they setting goals and objectives in learning English. As a
result, they paid more attention during their English class. c) on affective strategy
category, most respondents agreed that they liked English subject. This can perhaps
become a good starting point for teachers to give more motivation and be more
sympathetic in teaching English; d) on memory strategy category, the respondents
commonly admitted that they wrote down every single new vocabulary and did their
homework at home; e) on social strategy category, the respondents mostly did not
hesitate to give questions on something they did not understand. The majority of the
respondents agreed that they did not very much employed compensation strategy in
learning English.

12
ABSTRAK

Yaimin, 2006, A Study of Language Learning Strategies of Elementary School


Pupils at SDN 1 Bengkulu

Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah untuk menyelidiki strategi belajar yang diterapkan
oleh murid-murid SDN 1 Kota Bengkulu dalam mempelajari bahasa Inggris. Populasi
dari penelitian ini adalah seluruh murid SDN 1 Bengkulu kelas 3, 4, dan 5 yang
berjumlah 238 murid. Sample penelitian ini adalah 25% dari seluruh populasi yang
berarti 72 murid. Penelitian ini mempergunakan angket sebagai instrumen
pengumpulan data. Hasil-hasil yang diperoleh dari kegiatan penelitian ini
menunjukan bahwa, secara umum, strategi belajar yang paling banyak dipergunakan
oleh responden penelitian adalah strategi kognitif. Baru kemudian disusul oleh
strategi metakognitif, afektif, memori, sosial, and kompensasi. Beberapa poin penting
yang patut dicatat dari penelitian ini dijabarkan sebagai berikut: a) pada kategori
strategi kognitif, sebagian besar responden sepakat bahwa mereka banyak
mempergunakan dua metode berikut dalam mempelajari Bahasa Inggris: latihan
mandiri dalam menghafal dan menulis, menganalisa mimik muka guru dalam
menebak arti kosakata, dan menterjemahkan arti kosakata; b) pada kategori strategi
metakognitif, banyak responden yang mengakui bahwa mereka menetapkan tujuan
pembelajaran dalam belajar Bahasa Inggris. Hasilnya, mereka ternyata lebih fokus
dalam memperhatikan penjelasan guru Bahasa Inggris mereka; c) pada kategori
strategi afektif, hamper keseluruhan responden menyetujui bahwa Bahasa Inggris
adalah pelajaran kesukaan mereka. Hal ini tentu merupakan suatu modal awal yang
sangat baik bagi para guru mata pelajaran Bahasa Inggris untuk lebih memberi
semangat dan dorongan kepada para siswa mereka; d) pada kategori strategi memori,
banyak responden yanf mengakui bahwa mereka selalu menulis setiap kosakata baru
yang diperkenalkan oleh guru mereka dan mereka juga selalu mengerjakan PR di
rumah; e) pada kategori strategi sosial, responden terbukti tidak pernah ragu dalam
mengajukan pertanyaan terhadap penjelasan guru yang mereka anggap kurang dapat
dipahami. Dari hasil penelitian ini, mayoritas responden terbukti sangat kurang
mempergunakan strategi kompensasi dalam mempelajari Bahasa Inggris.

13
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

In order to improve its quality of education, the government of Bengkulu has

officially launched the Bengkulu as the City of Learners Program since April 2004

(Ginting: 2004). It is expected that through this program, Bengkulu can be one of the

most reputable provinces in term of education at least in Sumatra. One of the

objectives of the program is to introduce English to children at the very early stage. In

other words, English will be taught to elementary school pupils of grades 4, 5, and 6

in all parts of Bengkulu.

There are two major reasons to this policy. The first reason greatly relates to

the psycholinguistic point of view. The human brain is not fully developed at birth.

Rather, it matures gradually over a period of several years, Locke (1983). There has

been some speculation that language and other cognitive skills must be acquired prior

to the completion of this maturational process, also called the critical period, which

extends from age two to puberty, Lenneberg (1984). It is because during the critical

period children actively develop their brain. As a result, the brain can easily absorb

any sort of cognitive information that may takes place during the teaching and

learning activities. Thus, it is very important to introduce English to children as soon

as possible regarding that they are in their most valuable critical period.

1
The second is that the aim of the teaching of English in the elementary school

is merely to motivate the pupils in order that they will be ready and self-confident in

learning English in higher levels. Unlike other subject, English will be taught as one

of the local content subjects, Depdikbud (2004). It means that the students will not

have the same burden in learning English as the other elementary compulsory

subjects. The materials will be largely emphasized on vocabulary, speaking, and

simple grammar. In other words, the main goal of the teaching of English in the

elementary school is merely to introduce English as the first foreign language to the

pupils in order that they will be able to communicate in simple English. Thus, the

government may expect that for the next 5 years there will be a significant

achievement that can be accomplished by high school students on the subject of

English on their National Final Examination.

However, it is a well known fact that English is a considerable unfamiliar

language for the majority of Indonesian pupils. Therefore, here, in the teaching and

learning process, the pupils will be challenged to understand English subject. In order

to be able to do this, each pupil will employ his own strategies in learning English.

There is an important question that may arise from this situation and would

therefore be discussed in this study. For elementary school pupils who commonly

learn English as a foreign language for the first time, what kind of strategies will be

employed? It is important to find out the answer to this question. Many experts

believe that language learning strategies during the childhood period greatly influence

one’s success in learning foreign language, Oxford (1989). In other words, one’s

2
success in learning a foreign language greatly depends on his or her language learning

strategies during his or her childhood period.

A number of previous researchers have conducted researches under the

similar theme. However, it seems that the previous researchers quite satisfy by taking

the junior and senior high school students as the subjects of their researches. It is

noted that none of them ever try any attempts to take the elementary school students

as the subject of their studies. It was under this background that this study was

carried out by taking elementary school pupils as the subject of the research.

This research was conducted in SDN 1 Bengkulu. There were two major

reasons to this choice. The first, as it can be observed from the result of National

Final Examination from the previous five years, it has become an undeniable fact

that, at present moment, SDN 1 Bengkulu can be regarded as one of the most

qualified elementary school in Bengkulu. It means that, compared to other elementary

schools, the students of SDN 1 Bengkulu are averagely more competence in learning.

Secondly, SDN 1 Bengkulu is the only elementary school in Bengkulu which has

developed bilingual class as one of the parameters to be certified as internationally

standard elementary school. It means that the pupils of SDN 1 Bengkulu have more

opportunity to deal with English than the pupils of other elementary schools.

Hopefully this research can share a bit of contribution to improve the quality of

English teaching at the level of elementary school in Bengkulu.

3
1.2 The Formulation of Problem

This research would try to answer the following problem:

“What are the English language learning strategies applied by elementary

school pupils?”

1.3 The Research Objectives

This research was aimed to describe the English language learning strategies

applied by pupils in SDN 1 Bengkulu.

1.4 Significances of the Research

The findings of this research may hopefully be useful as information input

particularly for teachers, students and any individuals who have great interest in

developing basic education. In a smaller scope, it is expected that outcomes of this

research may inspire other researchers to carry out further research in the similar area.

1.5 The Limitation of the Research

As can be seen from the slightly presented explanation above, the factors

influencing the learning process constitute a wide topic. To limit the scope of the

problem, the writer will focus on the internal factors of the learner.

4
1.6 Operational Definitions

1. Strategy: A strategy in this research refers to what a pupil does

cognitively, affectively, and psychomotorically during the language

classroom.

2. Language learning: language learning differs from language acquisition.

Language learning in this study means teaching and learning activities that

occur in the classroom in a formal setting like.

3. Memory strategies: such as grouping or using imagery; have a highly

specific function. One of them is to help students to store and retrieve new

information.

4. Cognitive strategies: such as summarizing or reasoning deductively,

would enable learners to understand and produce new language by many

means.

5. Compensation strategies: like guessing or using synonyms, would allow

learners to use the language despite of their often large gaps in knowledge.

6. Affective strategies: are strategies applied by students to control their

emotions and attitudes about learning.

7. Social strategies: refers to social interactions which involve other people

such as asking questions, asking for clarification and cooperating with

peers.

5
CHAPTER II
LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Learning
Slamet in Mulyadi (2003) defines learning as a relatively permanent change in

behavior, which reflects in the form gaining knowledge, comprehension, or skills

which are achieved through experience.

In a similar view, Cronbach (1954) states that learning is characterized by

change in behavior as a result of experience. Behavior involves responses to a

situation. If a person makes different responses at present in compare to the past

period, it can be said that he has learned something. Furthermore, Gary and Kingsley

in Snelbecker (1974) state that learning is the process by which behavior, in a broad

sense, is originated or changed through practices or trainings. Therefore, here, the

change caused by maturity or natural growth cannot be regarded as the result of

learning.

From the previous definitions, it can be concluded that learning is a change

which is due to an experiences or trainings and therefore not due to natural growth.

Thus, the change in the learner can be planned. If a teacher wants his pupils to learn

something, he has to facilitate them with the experience or training that support what

he wishes his students want to learn.

6
2.2 Learning Strategies

According to Gagne in Brown (1980) a strategy may be defined as a particular

method of approaching a problem or task, a mode of operation for achieving a

particular end, or a planned design for controlling and manipulating certain

information. A learning strategy is therefore a method of perceiving and storing

particular items for later recall.

In a similar thought, Oxford (1989) defines learning strategy as specific

actions taken by a learner to make learning easier, faster, more enjoyable, more self-

directed, more effective, and more transferable to new situation. For the further

discussion of learning strategy, this study shall applied Oxford (1989) for the

references of the discussion. Oxford divides strategies into two major classes: direct

and indirect. Direct strategies deals with the new language, which consists of three

classes: memory, cognitive and compensation strategies. Indirect strategies are

strategies that support and manage language learning without directly involving the

target language. Indirect strategies are divided into metacognitive, affective, and

social strategies.

Memory strategies, such as, grouping or using imagery, have a specific

function: helping students store and retrieve new information. Memory strategies fall

into four sets:

a. Creating mental linkages: grouping, associating/elaborating, and placing new

words into a context.

b. Appling images and sounds: using imagery, semantic mapping, using keyword

and representing sounds in memory.

7
c. Reviewing well: structured reviewing.

d. Employing action: using physical response or sensation, and using mechanical

technical techniques.

Figure 1 Diagram of the Memory Strategies


1. Grouping

A. Creating mental linkages 2. Associating / elaborating


3. Placing new words into a
context

1. Using Imagery

2. Semantic mapping
B. Applying images and
sounds
3. Using keywords
I. Memory
4. Representing sounds in memory
Strategies

C. Reviewing well 1. Structured reviewing

1. Using physical response or


sensation
D. Employing action

2. Using mechanical techniques

Cognitive strategies, such as summarizing or reasoning deductively, would

enable learners to understand and produce the target language by many different

means. Cognitive strategies have four sets:

a. Practicing: repeating; formally practicing with sounds and writing system,

recognizing and using formulas and patterns, recombining, and practicing.

b. Receiving and sending messages: getting the idea quickly, using resources for

receiving and sending messages.

8
c. Analyzing and reasoning: reasoning deductively, analyzing expressions,

analyzing contrastively, translating, and transferring.

d. Creating structure for input and output: taking notes, summarizing, and

highlighting.

Figure 2 Diagram of the Cognitive Strategies

1. Repeating
2. Formally practicing with sounds
and writing system
3. Recognizing and using formulas
A. Practicing
and patterns
4. Recombining

5. Practicing naturalistically

1. Getting the idea quickly


B. Receiving and sending
messages 2. Using resources for receiving and
sending messages

1. Reasoning deductively
II. Cognitive
Strategies
2. Analyzing expressions
C. Analyzing and 3. Analyzing contrastively (across
reasoning languages)
4. Translating

5. Transferring

1. Taking notes
D. Creating structure for
2. Summarizing
input and output
3. Highlighting

Compensation strategies, like guessing or using synonyms, allow learners to

use the language despite their often large gaps in knowledge. Compensation strategies

consist of:

9
a. Guessing intelligently: using linguistic clues, and using other clues.

b. Overcoming limitations in speaking and writing: switching to the mother tongue,

getting help, using mime or gesture, avoiding communication partially or totally,

selecting the topic, adjusting or totally, selecting the topic, adjusting or

approximating the message, coining words, and using a circumlocution or

synonym.

Figure 3 Diagram of the Compensation Strategies

1. Using linguistics clues


A. Guessing Intelligently
2. Using other clues

1. Switching to the mother


tongue
2. Getting help
III. Compensation
Strategies
3. Using mime and gesture
B. Overcoming limitations in 4. Avoiding communication
speaking and writing partially or totally
5. Selecting the topic
6. Adjusting or
approximating the
message
7. Coining words
8. Using a circumlocution or
synonym

Metacognitive strategies allow learners to control their own cognition, which

is to coordinate the learning process by using functions such as centering, arranging,

planning, and evaluating. Metacognitive strategies consist of:

a. Centering learning: to overview and linking with already known material, paying

attention, delaying speech production to focus on listening.

10
b. Arranging and planning learning: finding out about language learning,

organizing, setting goals and objectives, planning for a language task, seeking

practice opportunities.

c. Evaluating learning: self-monitoring, self-evaluating.

Figure 4 Diagram of the Metacognitive Strategies

1. Overviewing and linking with already


known material
A. Centering
2. Paying attention
learning
3. Delaying speech production to focus on
listening

1. Finding out about language learning

2. Organizing

3. Setting goals and objectives


B.. Arranging and 4. Identifying the purpose of a language
IV. Metacognitive
planning task (purposeful listening/ reading/
Strategies
learning speaking/ writing
5. Planning for a language task

6. Seeking practice opportunities

1. Self-monitoring
C. Evaluating
learning
2. Self-evaluating

Affective strategies help to regulate emotions, motivations, and attitudes.

Affective strategies fall into three sets:

a. Lowering anxiety: using progressive relaxation, deep breathing or meditation,

using music, and using jokes.

b. Self encouraging: giving positive statements, taking risks wisely, giving reward

to students.

11
c. Taking emotional temperature: paying attention to responses, using a checklist,

writing a language learning diary, discussing feelings with peers.

Figure 5 Diagram of the Affective Strategies

1. Using progressive relaxation, deep


breathing, or meditation
A. Lowering anxiety 2. Using music

3. Using laughter

1. Making positive statements


V. Affective
B. Encouraging self 2. Taking risks wisely
Strategies
3. Rewarding self

1. Listening to body

2. Using a checklist
C. Taking emotional
temperature
3. Writing a language learning diary
4. Discussing feelings with someone
else

Social strategies help students learn through interaction with others. Social

strategies fall into three sets:

a. Giving questions: asking for clarification or verification, asking for correction.

b. Cooperating with others: with peers, with proficient users of the new language.

c. Empathizing with others: developing cultural understanding, becoming aware of

other’s thoughts and feelings.

12
Figure 6 Diagram of the Social Strategies
1. Asking for clarification or verification
A. Asking questions
2. Asking for correction

1. Cooperating with peers


VI. Social
B. Cooperating with
Strategies 2. Cooperating with proficient users of the
others
new language

1. Developing cultural understanding


C. Empathizing with
others 2. Becoming aware of others’ thoughts
and feelings

Basically, learning strategies are steps taken by students to enhance their own

learning. Strategies are especially important for language learning because they are

tools for active, self-directed involvement, which is essential for developing

communicative competence. Appropriate language learning strategies result in

improved proficiency and greater self-confidence.

How language learning strategies stimulate the growth of communicative

competence in general can be seen as follows: metacognitive strategies help learners

regulate their own cognition to focus, plan and evaluate their progress as they move

toward communicative competence. Affective strategies develop the self-confidence

and perseverance needed for learners to involve themselves actively in language

learning. Social strategies provide increased interaction and more emphatic

comprehension toward the lesson.

13
2.3 Related Studies

Table 1 The List of Related Studies


No. Researcher Title Result
1. Titin Yusnita The English Learning The study showed that most
(2002) Strategies Used by The students used overall
Students of Islamic strategies in learning English
Education Study Program
at STAIN Bengkulu.
2. Renita Utama English Learning The study showed that most
(2003) Strategies Among the students applied
Second Year Students of metacognitive strategies,
the SMUN 3 Bengkulu. while the least used was the
memory and social group.
3. Nopriansah The Differences of The majority of the students
(2004) Individual Learners in applied memory strategies.
Using Learning Strategies Very few of them applied
to Learn English Structure. other strategies such as:
cognitive strategies,
compensation and
metacognitive strategies.
4. Khalid (2005) English Learning Most students in this research
Strategies Used By The applied metacognitive
Diploma Three (DIII) strategies and the rest
English Department preferred overall strategies.
Students of Universitas
Bengkulu Academic Year
2005-2006.

14
CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Research Design

The research was a descriptive quantitative, which emphasized to describe the

English language learning strategies applied by pupils in SDN 1 Bengkulu. As a

descriptive study, the researcher did not set out the test hypothesis, but rather served

the result of his result. The data served are consequently free to vary during the

course of the observation (Larsen-Freeman and Long, 1991).

3.2 Population and Sample

3.2.1. Population

The populations of the research were the pupils of SD Negeri 1 Bengkulu

(grades 4, 5, and 6). The detail of the population can be seen on the following table.

Table 2. The Data Base of Pupils of SDN 1 Bengkulu


Class Male Female Total
IVA 19 18 37
IVB 23 16 39
VA 22 16 38
VB 30 13 43
VIA 24 20 44
VIB 18 19 37
TOTAL 136 102 238
Source: Data Siswa SDN 1 Kota Bengkulu

15
3.2.2 Sample

Arikunto, (1989) states that if the population of a research is below 100, the

researcher has to take all of them as a sample. But if the population is over 100, the

researcher can take only 20%-25% of them. Since the number of students in this

research reached 238, the sample of this research was therefore 25% of the entire

populations which means 60 pupils. It is noted that the sample of this research was

managed by having two different classes as there are a number of factors which make

it impossible to apply the whole classes as the sample of this research.

3.3. The Data Collection

The data collection was carried out by distributing questionnaires among all

the samples which consists of two stages: 1) the try out stage which was carried out at

May 12th 2006, and 2) the data collection stage which was carried out at May 21st

2006. It is noted that during those two stages, the sample pupils were assisted by the

researcher along with their teachers so that they can easily get explanation whenever

they got troubles in understanding the items of the questionnaire. This is very

important in order to guarantee the validity and reliability of the questionnaire’s

results.

3.3.1 The Research Instrument

The data of this research was collected by distributing questionnaire based on

the model of Likert Scale in which each item will have five possible answers:

strongly agree (SA), agree (A), Undecided (U), disagree (D), and strongly disagree

(SD). Each respond was then associated with a particular point and every

16
respondent’s scores was then determined by summing up the points of each

statement.

Table 3 The Likert Scale


Statement SD D U A SA
Positive 1 2 3 4 5
Negative 5 4 3 2 1

3.3.2 Construction of the Questionnaire

The questionnaire consisted of 46 items which are grouped into six aspects:

1. Memory strategies, items number: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13

2. Compensation strategies, items number: 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19

3. Metacognitive strategies, items number: 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26

4. Affective strategies, items number: 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32

5. Social strategies, items number: 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39

6. Cognitive strategies 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46.

The try out of the questionnaire was carried out at May 12th 2006 at SDN 18

Bengkulu which included 38 pupils.

3.3.3 Validity

In order to find out the validity level of the questionnaire, the researcher the t-

test formula was employed. The formula is as follows:

x − 1− x − 2
t=
1 1
S 2 gab ( + )
n n

17
S2 gab = (n1 – 1) s12 + (n2 – 1) s22
n1+ n2 - 2
Where:
t = the value of the statistical significance of the mean difference
X1 = group of high score
X2 = group of low score
S gab = variance of item
n1 = the high respondent number
n2 = the low respondent number

After the calculation employed, there were 46 items which were considered

valid. This was because their t-value were higher than the criteria value of t listed in

the table which was 1.73 at the 5 percent significant level for N=38. The other five

items had to be left out because the validity score were less than 1.73. The five items

dropped out were as follows:

1. Item 17 and 18 which belonged to the compensation strategy

2. Item 23 which belonged to the metacognitive strategy

3. Item 36 and 37 which belonged to the affective strategy.

3.3.4 Reliability

The researcher also found out the reliability after the validity of instrument

obtained. The reliability was obtained by using the Cronbach Alpha formula since the

instruments rating scale is from 1 to 5. Arikunto states that the formula is applicable

in finding out the reliability of instrument with scale Likert 1-5.

⎡ K ⎤ ⎡ ΣS i ⎤
2
∝= ⎢ x ⎢1 − ⎥
⎣ K − I ⎥⎦ ⎢⎣ ΣS t ⎥⎦
2

18
Where:
α = the instrument reliability
k = the number of items
S12 = the variant of total scores
St2 = the variant of respondents for item to t

After the calculation employed, all the 46 valid items were considered reliable

since their reliability value reached 1.019 which was higher than 0.80 as the standard

of reliability.

3.4 Data Analysis Techniques

The data of this research was analyzed based on the previous study by Arasuli

and Suwarno (2004), which applies the following statistics formulas:

1. Weighted Mean

The weighted mean of every statement was found out as follows:

Σf x w
M=
Σf

Where:
M : The weighted mean score of each statement
f : The frequency of respondents who choose an alternative answer
∑ f : The frequency of respondents in all choices
w : Weight/the score of an alternative answer
∑ f x w : Number of the frequency multiplied to the score of each alternative
answer

The mean for the entire items for a group was found out by applying the

following formula:

ΣM⋅N
Mg =
ΣN

19
Where:
Mg : The mean of the whole statements for a group (group average)
M : The mean of each statement
N : Number of respondent answering each statement
∑ N : Number of all respondents for the whole statement (for a group)

2. Proportion (Percentage)

The percentage of the answer was found out by using this formula:

f
P = x 100 %
Σf

Where:
f : Frequency of responses for each category for a statement
∑ f : Number of responses in the whole, for a statement

3. Interpretation of Mean

The following procedure was applied in interpretation of means:

a. Dividing the means into five categories: very high, high, moderate, low, and

very low.

b. Determining the range of score (r), i.e. the ratio of the highest and lowest

score, in this case it is 5 –1 = 4

c. Determining the length of each category (P) by dividing the range with the

number of classes, in this case it is P = 4/5 = 0.8

d. Determining the lowest scores of classes.

e. Determining the highest score of the first class by dividing the lowest score of

the first class with p minus 1.1, in this case it is 1.1+1.8–1.1=1.8

The highest score of other classes are found out by using the same method.

20
f. Table of categories

Table 4 The Classifications of Language Learning Strategies


Class Category/Predicate
4.30-5.0 Very High
3.50-4.20 High
2.70-3.40 Moderate
1.90-2.60 Low
1.00-1.80 Very Low

21
CHAPTER IV

RESULT AND DISCUSSION

4.1 Results

The following table shows the learning strategies of the pupils of SDN 1

Bengkulu by total average.

Chart 1 The General Profile of Learning Strategies

LEARNING STRATEGIES

Compensation
Cognitive (3.50)
(2.74) 15%
19%

Social (2.83)
16%

Metacognitive
(3.27) 18%

Memory (2.84)
16%
Affective (2.94)
16%

From the data above, it is clear that the most respondents preferred using the

cognitive strategy in learning English with total average of 3.50. It is followed by the

metacognitive strategy with total average of 3.27. The third was the affective strategy

with total average of 2.94. The memory strategy and the social strategy came as the

22
third and the fourth with total averages of 2.84 and 2.83. The least one was the

compensation strategy with total average of 2.74.

4.1.1 Cognitive Strategy

Table 5 The Total Average of Cognitive Strategy

No. Frequency Weight


Weighted
of SD D U A SA SD D U A SA N Sum Average
Predicate
Item
F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 W1 W2 W3 W4 W5
40 3 10 11 28 20 1 2 3 4 5 72 268 3.72 High
(4 %) (14 %) (15 %) (39 %) (28 %)
41 7 12 10 22 21 1 2 3 4 5 72 254 3.53 High
(10 %) (17 %) (14 %) ( 31 %) (29 %)
42 9 10 12 19 22 1 2 3 4 5 72 251 3.49 Moderate
(13 %) (14 %) (17 %) ( 26 %) (31 %)
43 9 12 10 20 21 1 2 3 4 5 72 248 3.44 Moderate
(13 %) (17 %) (14 %) ( 28 %) (29 %)
44 6 8 11 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 72 267 3.71 High
(8 %) (11 %) (15 %) ( 32%) (33 %)
45 8 13 16 32 33 1 2 3 4 5 72 238 3.31 Moderate
(11 %) (18 %) (22 %) ( 26 %) (22 %)
46 5 14 17 24 12 1 2 3 4 5 72 240 3.33 Moderate
(7 %) (19 %) (24 %) ( 33 %) (17 %)
SUM 504 24.53

24.53 x 72 1766.16
= High
Total Average 504 504
= 3.504 = 3.5
SD: Strongly Disagree, D: Disagree, U: Undecided, A: Agree, SA: Strongly Agree

With three items considered to have high predicate and none of them

considered to have low predicate, it is clear that cognitive strategy was the most

preferred learning strategy by elementary school pupils. There were two interesting

findings of this category. The first was showed on item forty with the highest total

average of 3.72 that most respondents admitted that they very often memorizing

vocabularies and practicing to write them down in order to be easily learned. This

23
indicated that the respondents learn English very well through formally practicing

with sounds and writing systems. While the second one was item forty four where

most respondents agreed that they learned quite a few vocabularies from their

dictionaries. This proved that the respondents preferred translation method in learning

English as previously described in the literature review. From this point, it can be

concluded that the two aforementioned methods are applicable for English teachers to

be further developed in their pupils’ cognitive strategy. The third item achieved the

highest total average was item forty one where most respondents agreed when they

were asked if they can guess the meanings of certain vocabularies by analyzing their

teachers’ expressions.

Even though other items considered as moderate, it is important, however, to

conduct further analysis on them. On Item forty two the respondents were asked if

they self-learned the grammatical patterns in learning English. The result showed that

most respondents hardly recognizing and using grammatical patterns in learning

English. The respondents very often found out the main core of their English lesson.

This conclusion derived from item forty three which only gained total average of 3.44

and be therefore considered as moderate. Perhaps, there is one point that should be

given more attention for English teachers. It is the pupils’ reluctances in writing down

all the words or even vocabularies wrote down on the blackboard. This conclusion

resulted from item forty six which only gained the total average of 3.33. From this

point, it can be inferred that it would be better for teachers not to write down all their

teaching materials on the blackboard. The last item of this category which gained the

total average of 3.31 is item forty five where the respondents were asked if they very

24
often compare two antonyms so that they can learn those two words easily. This

indicated that respondents mostly hardly open their vocabulary. In other words, the

respondents mainly acquired their vocabularies from their English teachers during

their lessons at school.

4.1.2 Metacognitive Strategy

Table 6 The Total Average of Metacognitive Strategy

No. Frequency Weight


Weighted
of SD D U A SA SD D U A SA N Sum Average
Predicate
Item
F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 W1 W2 W3 W4 W5
20 16 20 19 14 3 1 2 3 4 5 72 184 2.56 Low
(22 %) (28 %) (26 %) (19 %) (4 %)
21 3 4 8 24 23 1 2 3 4 5 72 296 4.11 High
(4 %) (6 %) (11%) ( 33 %) (46 %)
22 1 13 26 21 11 1 2 3 4 5 72 244 3.39 Moderate
(1 %) (18 %) (36 %) ( 29 %) (15 %)
23 2 12 20 13 10 1 2 3 4 5 72 251 3.49 High
(3 %) (17 %) (28 %) ( 35 %) (18 %)
24 13 16 20 25 13 1 2 3 4 5 72 207 2.88 Moderate
(18 %) (22 %) (28 %) ( 18 %) (14 %)
25 22 10 3 14 23 1 2 3 4 5 72 222 3.08 Moderate
(31 %) (14 %) (4 %) ( 19 %) (32 %)
26 5 15 10 31 11 1 2 3 4 5 72 244 3.39 Moderate
(7 %) (21 %) (14 %) ( 43 %) (15 %)
SUM 504 22.89

22.89 x 72 1648.08
= Moderate
Total Average 504 504
= 3.27
SD: Strongly Disagree, D: Disagree, U: Undecided, A: Agree, SA: Strongly Agree

In this category, there are two items which acquired the highest total average.

The first is item twenty one with the total average of 4.11, where the respondents

were asked if they had strong motivation in mastering fluent English. The second

25
item is item twenty three with the total average of 3.49, where the respondents were

asked if they pay much attention during their English class. There is a strong

relationship between these two items. It is that the students’ strong motivation in

learning English, as described on item twenty one, which made them took an active

part in every teaching and learning activities.

There are four items on this category which considered as moderate. It is

interesting to find out that there are two items, which were twenty two and item

twenty six, which gained the same total average. The former item asked the

respondents if they found opportunities in improving their English. While the latter

asked the respondents if they often re-checked their homework before they submit it

to their teachers. There is, however, a slight difference between the two items. The

percentage of respondents who agreed on the statement on item twenty six was higher

than the percentage of the same category on item twenty two. It indicated that perhaps

teachers should give more encouragement for students who seek opportunities to

improve their English outside the classrooms.

Another moderate item is item twenty five where the respondents were asked

if they joined English course as extra curricular activity. With the total average of

3.08, this item indicated that most respondents still reluctant to join English course

which may be beneficial for their English skills’ improvement. It may be inferred,

however, that it is suggested for English teachers to describe the benefits of having

English course to the pupils.

Item twenty four asked the respondents if they had any strict schedules in

learning English. As obtained the total average of 2.88, this item proved that most

26
respondents never had any strict schedules in learning English. Perhaps, they did have

learning schedules but it is not dedicated to one particular subject, such as English.

The last item which acquired the lowest total average is item twenty where the

respondents were asked if they normally related the contents of reading or listening

materials with their personal experience. With the total average of 2.56, this item

showed that the ability to connect the lessons materials with one’s personal

experience is perhaps still considerable too difficult to master particularly for

elementary school pupils.

4.1.3 Affective Strategy

Table 7 The Total Average of Affective Strategy

No. Frequency Weight


Weighted
of SD D U A SA SD D U A SA N Sum Average
Predicate
Item
F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 W1 W2 W3 W4 W5
27 5 22 26 10 9 1 2 3 4 5 72 212 2.94 Moderate
(7 %) (31 %) (36 %) (14 %) (13 %)
28 5 22 21 20 4 1 2 3 4 5 72 212 2.94 Moderate
(7 %) (31 %) (29 %) ( 28 %) (6 %)
29 5 11 22 23 11 1 2 3 4 5 72 240 3.33 Moderate
(7 %) (15 %) (31 %) ( 32 %) (15 %)
30 19 14 13 15 11 1 2 3 4 5 72 201 2.79 Moderate
(26 %) (19 %) (18 %) ( 21 %) (15 %)
31 1 11 22 31 35 1 2 3 4 5 72 278 3.86 High
(8 %) (11 %) (15 %) ( 32%) (33 %)
Very
32 37 18 13 3 1 1 2 3 4 5 72 129 1.79
Low
(11 %) (18 %) (22 %) ( 26 %) (22 %)
SUM 432 17.67

17.67 x 72 1272.24
= Moderate
Total Average 432 432
= 2.94
SD: Strongly Disagree, D: Disagree, U: Undecided, A: Agree, SA: Strongly Agree

27
There is only one item on this category which obtained the highest total

average. It is item thirty where the respondents were asked if they liked English

subject. With the total average of 3.86, this item indicated that there is enough

motivation of the students as a good starting point for their English teachers.

Unfortunately, there is also one item which is considered as the very low predicate. It

is item thirty two where the pupils showed that they reluctant to write down all their

personal daily experiences on their diary. With the total average of 1.79, this item

showed that writing skill is not very common on elementary school pupils.

There are four moderate items on this category. The highest one is item

twenty nine with the total average of 3.33. It is interesting to find out most

respondents did not hesitate in expressing their thoughts feelings in English

regardless their limited skill in English. Another interesting point can be observed as

we see item twenty seven and item twenty eight which had similar total average of

2.94. However, item there were more respondents who strongly agreed on item

twenty seven than in item twenty eight. As item twenty seven asked the respondents

if they were calm whenever they have to speak up in English, and item twenty eight

asked them if they were more confident in doing the similar activity, the result

indicated that the majority of the respondents preferred calmness than confidence

whenever they were asked to speak up in English.

Item thirty of this category gained the least total average in which the

respondents were asked if they quite often heard English songs whenever they studied

English at home. With the total average of 3.86, the item showed that most

respondents found that listening to English songs while studying English would be

28
annoying. This result, however, did not match with what many experts believe that

music can be used to reduce the children’s anxiety.

4.1.4 Memory Strategy

Table 8 The Total Average of Memory Strategy

No. Frequency Weight


Weighted
of SD D U A SA SD D U A SA N Sum Average
Predicate
Item
F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 W1 W2 W3 W4 W5
1 5 17 37 13 0 1 2 3 4 5 72 202 2.81 Moderate
(7 %) (24 %) (51 %) (18 %) (0 %)
2 15 23 25 6 3 1 2 3 4 5 72 175 2.43 Low
(21 %) (32 %) (35 %) ( 8 %) (4 %)
3 8 20 20 22 2 1 2 3 4 5 72 206 2.86 Moderate
(11 %) (28 %) (28 %) (31 %) (3 %)
4 11 12 22 21 6 1 2 3 4 5 72 215 2.99 Moderate
(15 %) (17 %) (31 %) (29 %) (8 %)
5 24 24 15 6 3 1 2 3 4 5 72 156 2.17 Low
(33 %) (33 %) (21 %) ( 8 %) (4 %)
6 24 15 18 11 4 1 2 3 4 5 72 172 2.39 Low
(33 %) (21 %) (25 %) ( 15 %) (6 %)
7 15 20 19 11 7 1 2 3 4 5 72 191 2.65 Moderate
(21 %) (28 %) (26 %) ( 15 %) (10 %)
8 23 23 14 9 3 1 2 3 4 5 72 162 2.25 Low
(32 %) (32 %) (19 %) ( 13 %) (4 %)
9 5 16 20 24 7 1 2 3 4 5 72 228 3.17 Moderate
(7 %) (22 %) (28 %) (33 %) (10 %)
10 1 11 18 31 11 1 2 3 4 5 72 256 3.56 High
(1 %) (15 %) (25 %) ( 43 %) (15 %)
11 0 5 4 26 37 1 2 3 4 5 72 311 4.32 High
(0 %) (7%) (6 %) ( 36 %) (51 %)
12 15 25 19 12 1 1 2 3 4 5 72 175 2.43 Low
(21 %) (35 %) (26 %) ( 17%) (1 %)
13 11 14 21 20 6 1 2 3 4 5 72 212 2.94 Moderate
(15 %) (19 %) (29 %) ( 28 %) (8 %)
SUM 936 36.96

36.96 x 72 2661.12
= Moderate
Total Average 936 936
= 2.84
SD: Strongly Disagree, D: Disagree, U: Undecided, A: Agree, SA: Strongly Agree

29
There are two items which managed to gain the highest total averages on this

category. The first is item eleven where the pupils confirmed that they did all the

homework given by their English teachers. This proved that homework still become

the most reliable device in having the students re-learning the given lessons materials

at home. The second highest item is item ten where the respondents were asked if

they wrote down all new vocabularies. Up to this point, it is clear that teachers should

be more aware in giving their pupils vocabularies. It is because the pupils would be

very reluctant to write down every single word on the blackboard as previously

described on the last item of the cognitive strategy category.

There are, however, five other items which gained the low predicate. The first

is item five which indicated that most the respondents hardly ever practicing to write

letters or anything in English. The second lowest item was item eight where most

respondents stated that they spoke in English outside the classroom, with their

friends, families, or their English teachers. It is clear that on this point, teachers

should encourage the students to be more confident in practicing their spoken English

outside the classrooms. Another low predicated item is item six where the most

respondents clarified that they did not enjoy reading text in English. It is an

interesting finding that there were two items which shared the same total average of

2.43. The first was item two where the majority of the respondents ignored English-

speaking television programs. The second was item twelve where most respondents

learned new vocabularies through pictures.

The other item achieved moderate predicates. The first is item nine where the

respondents were asked if they did memorize every new vocabulary given by their

30
teachers at school. As this item was the highest one among the other moderate items,

it can be inferred that the respondents need more innovative methods so that they

would be motivated in memorizing new vocabularies given during the school lessons.

The second is item four where most respondents confirmed they quite uninterested in

singing English songs. The result of this item greatly relates with the result of the last

item of this category where the respondents denied that they liked to memorize

English songs. The respondents agreed that they did not learned well by making up

one’s grammatical patterns from their teachers’ sentences. This can be clearly

observed on item three which had the total average of 2.86. The majority of

respondents also found out that it did not help them learning English well by

imitating the role models on television. This is the result of item seven which gained

the least total average of 2.65.

4.1.5 Social Strategy

The only item which managed to gain the high predicate is the first item of

this where the respondents were asked if they did ask questions to some one else

about anything they did not know in English subject. This indicated teachers should

behave in a more sympathetic manner in answering their students’ questions.

There are three items in which most respondents put low categories on them.

The first is item thirty seven where most respondents ever spoke with their friends in

English outside the classroom. The second is item thirty six where the majority of the

respondents denied that they had a special study group for English subject. While the

third one is item thirty five in which most respondents clearly stated that they hardly

31
greeted their teachers outside the classrooms by using English utterances. All these

three items deal with the respondents’ willingness to practice their spoken English

outside the classroom. From this point, it can be concluded that it would take more

serious effort for English teachers to motivate their pupils not to reluctant or even

hesitate to practice their spoken English in their daily activities.

Table 9 The Total Average of Social Strategy

No. Frequency Weight


Weighted
of SD D U A SA SD D U A SA N Sum Average
Predicate
Item
F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 W1 W2 W3 W4 W5
33 3 16 11 28 14 1 2 3 4 5 72 250 3.47 High
(4 %) (22 %) (15 %) (39 %) (19 %)
34 10 23 13 17 9 1 2 3 4 5 72 208 2.89 Moderate
(14 %) (32 %) (18%) ( 24 %) (13 %)
35 16 23 17 9 7 1 2 3 4 5 72 184 2.56 Low
(1 %) (18 %) (36 %) ( 29 %) (15 %)
36 22 20 17 7 6 1 2 3 4 5 72 171 2.38 Low
(31 %) (28 %) (24 %) (105 %) (8 %)
37 26 23 18 3 2 1 2 3 4 5 72 148 2.06 Low
(36 %) (32 %) (25 %) ( 4 %) (3 %)
38 8 16 18 19 11 1 2 3 4 5 72 225 3.13 Moderate
(11 %) (22 %) (25 %) (26 %) (15 %)
39 5 14 17 24 12 1 2 3 4 5 72 240 3.33 Moderate
(7 %) (19 %) (24 %) ( 33 %) (17 %)
SUM 504 19.81

19.81 x 72 1426.32
= Moderate
Total Average 504 504
= 2.83
SD: Strongly Disagree, D: Disagree, U: Undecided, A: Agree, SA: Strongly Agree

The rest items were considerable moderate. On item thirty nine, most

respondents asked for repetition whenever they did not clearly heard the lines

addressed to them. Perhaps, the worst category which requires further improvement

is the social strategy where there are three items, out of seven items, which acquired

32
low scores. Those three lowest score items deal with the respondents’ inner

motivation in expressing their English to other people which is very significant in

developing one’s language skill. There is no doubt that teachers should work harder

to improve their pupils’ motivation in applying this strategy. The majority of the

respondents also watched English-speaking movies to acquire its culture. This can be

seen based on the result of item thirty eight with the total average of 3.13. The last

moderate item of this category is item thirty four where the respondents asked for

peer corrections when they made mistakes in their spoken English. All these three

moderate-predicated items need further improvement to make it can be classified as

the high predicated-items.

4.1.6 Compensation Strategy

Table 10 The Total Average of Compensation Strategy

No. Frequency Weight


Weighted
of SD D U A SA SD D U A SA N Sum Average
Predicate
Item
F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 W1 W2 W3 W4 W5
14 10 22 15 21 4 1 2 3 4 5 72 203 2.82 Moderate
(14 %) (31 %) (21 %) (29 %) (6 %)
15 3 22 15 24 8 1 2 3 4 5 72 228 3.17 Moderate
(4 %) (31 %) (21 %) ( 33 %) (11 %)
16 23 37 8 2 2 1 2 3 4 5 72 139 1.93 Low
(32 %) (51 %) (11 %) (3 %) (3 %)
17 10 21 16 18 7 1 2 3 4 5 72 207 2.88 Moderate
(14 %) (29 %) (22 %) ( 25 %) (10 %)
18 8 16 20 19 9 1 2 3 4 5 72 221 3.07 Moderate
(11%) (22 %) (28 %) (26%) (13 %)
19 17 17 20 15 3 1 2 3 4 5 72 186 2.58 Low
(24 %) (24 %) (28 %) ( 21 %) (4 %)
SUM 432 16.44

16.44 x 72 1184.68
= Moderate
Total Average 432 432
= 2.74
SD: Strongly Disagree, D: Disagree, U: Undecided, A: Agree, SA: Strongly Agree

33
It is not a considerable disgraceful fact to find out that none of the items in the

compensation strategy managed to acquire high point from the respondents. Indeed,

there were two out of its six items which acquired low predicates. The first is item

sixteen where most respondents showed that they used gestures whenever they get

into troubles in explaining their thoughts or ideas. The second is the last item of this

category where the majority of the respondents would make up new words of their

own if they did not the exact words to express their thoughts and feelings. However,

these to low-predicated items do not necessarily mean that the pupils had

considerable retarded skill in English. It is because the two skills merely applicable

for students with limited English skill. Therefore, it can be concluded that for two

skills, the lower the predicate, the better the pupils will be.

The other items considered moderate predicates. The first is item fifteen

where most respondents admitted that they guess the meanings of certain words from

the pictures provided. The majority of the respondents also admitted that they would

find similar words or phrases if they did not know the most suitable words whenever

they speak up in English. This was the result of item eighteen with the total average

of 3.07. Most respondents stated that they only speak up in English if the topics fit

their wants. This was the result of item seventeen with the total average of 3.07.

Perhaps the most interesting point of this category is that the respondents denied that

they found out the meanings of certain words simply by guessing from the sounds of

the words as described on fourteen. The result of this item seems not to correspond

with the theory previously described on the literature review. Perhaps this can be an

interesting topic for other researchers.

34
4.2 Discussions

There are three points which will be discussed on the section. The first is the

general analysis of the results of the research. It is interesting to find out that there

were two strategies commonly applied by the majority of the respondents. They are

the cognitive strategy and metacognitive strategy. This finding is considerable

interesting considering that the cognitive strategy represents direct strategies while

the metacognitive represents the indirect strategies. This indicated that most

respondents did not rely on one main strategy in learning foreign language.

Another point which will be discussed on this research is the detail analysis on

each category of the learning strategies. There were three items on the cognitive

strategy in which teachers can conduct further improvement. It is because the

majority of the respondents agreed to the statements of the three items which can be a

good starting point for teachers. The first is that most respondents stated that they did

memorizing vocabularies and keep practicing in writing them down so that those

vocabularies can be easier to be acquired. The second is that the majority of the

respondents clarified that they used dictionaries in acquiring new vocabularies. The

third is that the respondents commonly agreed that they acquired new vocabularies by

analyzing their teachers’ expressions. From this point, it can be concluded that

teachers need to improve their skill in motivating their students on these three items.

Representing the indirect strategies, there are two items on metacognitive

strategy in which most respondents agreed on the statements of the two items. The

first is item twenty one where the respondents commonly agreed that they had strong

motivation to learn English. The second one described on item twenty there where the

35
majority of the respondents admitted that they paid a lot of attention when someone is

speaking in English with them. From this point, there are at least two conclusions

which can be inferred. The first is that teachers should emphasize more on speaking

activities as it is the most preferred language as proven from the result of this

research. And last but not least, it is important for English teachers to be more

sympathetic in teaching English. It is because most respondents admitted that they

valued English as one of the most important subject.

The last point to be discussed on this section is about items in which the

majority of the respondents gave low predicate. There are eleven items which

considered being low predicate plus one item in which most respondents put very low

predicate on it. Five of them can be found on the memory strategy category. All the

five items on this category greatly related with self-learning-activities at home. It is

perhaps would be very beneficial for teachers to motivate their students to be more

excited in doing their self-learning activities at home. Teachers can also build a

mutual relationship with parents on this matter.

The two other low predicate items were on the compensation strategy

category. Both of which related with the respondents strategies in dealing with

difficulties when they happen to speak up in English. However, the low predicate on

these tow items did not necessarily means that there should be some improvement for

the students. It is because the items offered a method of compensation which did not

measure the students’ real proficiency.

There is only one strategy on metacognitive strategy category which had low

predicate. It is item twenty which indicated that most respondents did not normally

36
related their personal experience with their reading text or listening materials.

Compared with another research on similar theme (Khalid, 2005) the researcher

found out that the result on this item is considerable interesting. Using another

version of the same instrument, SILL (Strategy Inventory for Language Learning), he

suggested his findings as follows: the metacognitive strategy gained the highest

frequency with no singular item considered as the low predicate item, followed by the

other learning strategies. This slight differences, however, could possibly be resulted

form the differences of population and sample as he employed university students as

the population and sample of his research.

The three other low predicate items can be found on the social strategy

category which related to the respondents’ motivation in improving their speaking

skill. Up to this point, it is necessary for teachers to motivate their students to practice

their spoken English outside the classroom activities. There is one item, however,

which acquired the very low predicate. It is the last item of the affective strategy

category which related to the pupils’ motivation in improving their writing skill by

writing daily diary. The result on this item, however, did not correspond with what

many experts have believed as previously described on the literature review: that

practicing writing can catalyze one’s integrated language skill.

37
CHAPTER V

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

5.1 Conclusions

Based on the previously described result of this research, it can be concluded

that:

1. In general, the pupils employed the cognitive strategy in learning English.

2. The other strategies employed were the metacognitive strategy, affective

strategy, the memory strategy, the social strategy, and the compensation

strategy.

3. There were, however, some interesting findings on each category:

a. On cognitive strategy category, the majority of the respondents agreed that

they learned English well by the two following methods: formally

practicing with sounds and writing systems, analyzing expressions, and

translating.

b. On metacognitive strategy, most respondents agreed that they setting goals

and objectives in learning English. As a result, they paid more attention

during their English class.

c. On affective strategy category, most respondents agreed that they liked

English subject. This can perhaps become a good starting point for

teachers to give more motivation and be more sympathetic in teaching

English.

38
d. On memory strategy category, the respondents commonly admitted that

they wrote down every single new vocabulary and did their homework at

home.

e. On social strategy category, the respondents mostly did not hesitate to

give questions on something they did not understand.

4. The majority of the respondents agreed that they did not very much employed

compensation strategy in learning English.

5.2 Suggestions

The results of this research showed that the majority of the respondents

preferred cognitive strategy along with metacognitive strategy as their learning

strategies. However, the following suggestions are hopefully applicable in order to

improve the quality of English teaching and learning activities. It is suggested that:

1. The pupils should be encouraged to read more English based-reading-text.

2. It is important for teachers to give responds to their students’ questions in a

sympathetic manner.

3. It would be better for teachers not to write down all unnecessary words on the

black board as the majority of the respondents felt that as annoying. Teachers

should merely therefore write down new vocabularies on the blackboard.

4. It is necessary for teachers to motivate their students to practice their spoken

English outside the classroom activities. Pupils should also be encouraged to

develop their own study group in order to improve their English.

39
5. It is important for teachers to build a mutual relationship with their pupils’

parents in order to motivate the pupils to conduct more self-learning activities

at home.

6. The outcomes of this study can hopefully become one of references for other

researchers to conduct researches upon the similar theme. It is suggested,

however, that for other researchers who have any interest to conduct

researches upon the similar theme to employ other kinds of instrument to

provide more useful outcome upon this theme.

40
REFERENCES

Arikunto, Suharsini. 1998. Prosedur Penelitian Suatu Pendekatan Praktek. Jakarta:


Rineka.
Brown, H.D. (1980). Principles of Language Learning & Teaching (First Edition).
Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall, Inc.
Cronbach, J. (1954). Educational Psychology. New York: Harcourt-Brace & Co.
Depdikbud. (2004). Kurikulum Berbasis Kompetensi untuk Pendidikan Dasar dan
Menengah: Mata Pelajaran Bahasa Inggris. Bengkulu: Depdikbud.
Ebel, R.L. (1969). Encyclopedia of Educational Research (Fourth Edition). London:
The Macmillan Company, Collier-Macmillan Limited.
Ellis, R. (1987). Understanding Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Ginting, Jeffri. (2004). Pemprov Canangkan Bengkulu Kota Pelajar. Bengkulu:
Harian Rakyat Bengkulu.
Hornby, A.S. 1995. Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary. Oxford: University
Press.
Lenneberg, J. (1984). Language Development: An Introduction. Columbus, Ohio:
Charles E. Merill
Locke, Jonathan. (1983). Phonological Acquisition and Change. New York:
Academic Press.
Mulyadi, & Puspita, Hilda. (2003). Kiat Belajar Sukses di Perguruan Tinggi. Jakarta:
Audi Grafika.
Oxford, R.L. (1989). Language Learning Strategies: What Every Teacher Should
Know. New York: Newbury House Publishers.
Sirkin, M.N. 1999. Statistics for the Social Sciences 2. California: Sage Publications.
Snelbecker, G.L. (1974). Learning Theories, Instructional Theory and
Psychoeducational Design. New York: McGraw Hill.

41
Appendices

42
ANGKET TRY OUT

Adik-adik yang manis, mohon diisi daftar pertanyaan berikut ini dengan jujur. Sebelum
mengisi, bacalah dengan baik setiap pernyataan di dalam tabel. Apabila ada pernyataan yang
kurang jelas, tanyakan terlebih dahulu dengan Bapak atau Ibu guru, baru kemudian diisi.
Jawaban yang adik-adik berikan tidak akan berpengaruh terhadap nilai rapor adik-adik.
Berikan jawaban dengan memberikan tanda silang pada kolom yang paling sesuai dengan cara
belajar adik-adik selama ini.

Nama : …………………………………………………
Kelas : …………………………………………………
Jenis Kelamin : Laki-laki / Perempuan (Coret yang tidak perlu)

KETERANGAN:
SJ : Sangat Jarang
J : Jarang
KK : Kadang-kadang
S : Sering
SS : Sangat Sering

No. Pernyataan SJ J KK S SS
Memory Strategies
1. Saya mengulangi pelajaran Bahasa Inggris di
rumah setiap hari.
2. Saya menonton acara TV yang menggunakan
Bahasa Inggris.
3. Saya mencari rumus dalam membuat kalimat
Bahasa Inggris dengan cara memperhatikan
pola-pola kalimat yang diberikan guru di kelas.
4. Saya menyanyikan lagu-lagu berbahasa
Inggris.
5. Saya menulis surat/karangan dalam Bahasa
Inggris.
6. Saya membaca cerita, buku, atau komik
Bahasa Inggris.
7. Saya meniru gaya dan cara berbicara orang
Inggris yang saya tonton di TV.
8. Saya berbicara dalam Bahasa Inggris dengan
keluarga, teman-teman, atau guru.
9. Saya menghafalkan setiap kata baru dalam
Bahasa Inggris yang diberikan guru saya.
10. Saya mencatat kata-kata baru Bahasa Inggris
yang saya dapatkan dari pelajaran di kelas.

43
No. Pernyataan SJ J KK S SS
11. Saya membuat PR Bahasa Inggris di rumah.

12. Saya menghubungkan arti kata-kata baru dalam


Bahasa Inggris dengan gambar agar kata-kata
baru tersebut lebih mudah dihafal.
13. Saya menghafal lagu-lagu Bahasa Inggris.
Compensation Strategies
14. Saya menebak arti dari kata-kata Bahasa
Inggris yang belum saya pahami dengan
memperhatikan bunyinya.
15. Saya menebak arti dari kata-kata baru dalam
Bahasa Inggris dengan memperhatikan gambar
yang menyertai kata-kata tersebut.
16. Saya menggunakan bahasa isyarat dengan
mempergunakan gerakan tangan dan mimik
muka ketika saya mengalami kesulitan ketika
berbicara dalam Bahasa Inggris.
17. Saya menggunakan kata-kata Bahasa Indonesia
jika saya tidak mengetahui suatu kata dalam
Bahasa Inggris.
18. Saya meminta bantuan orang lain apabila saya
tidak mengetahui suatu kata dalam Bahasa
Inggris.
19. Saya berusaha untuk berbicara dalam Bahasa
Inggris apabila yang ditawarkan adalah topik
kesukaan saya.
20. Saya menggunakan kata yang hampir sama
artinya jika saya tidak tahu arti suatu kata
dalam Bahasa Inggris.
21. Saya membuat kata baru jika saya tidak tahu
suatu kata dalam Bahasa Inggris baik dalam
berbicara maupun dalam menulis.
Metacognitive Strategies
22. Saya menghubungkan isi suatu
pembicaraan/bacaan dalam Bahasa Inggris
dengan pengalaman saya sendiri.
23. Saya membutuhkan banyak waktu untuk
berpikir ketika berbicara dalam Bahasa Inggris.
24. Saya ingin lancar berkomunikasi dalam Bahasa
Inggris.
25. Saya mencari-cari kesempatan untuk dapat
melatih kemampuan Bahasa Inggris saya.

44
No. Pernyataan SJ J KK S SS
26. Saya memperhatikan dengan baik ketika
seseorang berbicara dalam Bahasa Inggris.
27. Saya memiliki jadual belajar untuk belajar
Bahasa Inggris.

28. Saya mengikuti kursus Bahasa Inggris di


sekolah ataupun di luar sekolah.

29. Saya memeriksa ulang PR Bahasa Inggris saya


sebelum PR itu dikumpulkan.
Affective Strategies
30. Saya bersikap tenang ketika berbicara dalam
Bahasa Inggris.
31. Saya yakin dan percaya diri ketika berbicara
dalam Bahasa Inggris.
32. Saya berani berbicara dalam Bahasa Inggris
walaupun kerapkali salah.
33. Saya mendengarkan lagu-lagu berbahasa
Inggris ketika saya belajar Bahasa Inggris di
rumah.
34. Saya menyukai pelajaran Bahasa Inggris.
35. Saya mengungkapkan rasa senang saya dengan
anggota tubuh saya apabila saya benar dalam
menjawab soal latihan/ulangan Bahasa Inggris.
36. Saya memuji diri saya sendiri apabila saya
benar dalam menjawab soal latihan Bahasa
Inggris.
37. Saya menulis cerita/pengalaman saya di buku
harian dalam Bahasa Inggris.
Social Strategies
38. Saya bertanya kepada teman atau kepada guru
Bahasa Ingris saya apabila ada yang kurang
saya pahami.
39. Saya meminta bantuan teman atau guru Bahasa
Inggris saya untuk mengkoreksi ucapan saya
yang salah.
40. Saya menyapa guru Bahasa Inggris saya dalam
Bahasa Inggris.
41. Saya memiliki kelompok belajar khusus untuk
mata palajaran Bahasa inggris.
42. Saya berbicara dalam Bahasa Inggris dengan
teman-teman saya di dalam dan di luar kelas.

45
No. Pernyataan SJ J KK S SS
43. Saya menonton film berbahasa Inggris untuk
mempelajari budaya orang Inggris.
44. Saya meminta seseorang untuk berbicara pelan
atau mengulanginya lagi jika saya tidak
mengerti suatu kata dalam bahasa Inggris.
Cognitive Strategies
45. Saya menghafal kosakata dan berlatih
menuliskannya agar mudah dihafal.
No. Pernyataan SJ J KK S SS
46. Saya mempelajari arti suatu kata dalam Bahasa
Inggris dengan mengenali mimi muka guru
saya ketika ia sedang menerangkan di kelas.
47. Saya mempelajari rumus tatabahasa agar saya
dapat dengan mudah membuat suatu kalimat
dalam Bahasa Inggris.
48. Saya mencari tahu inti dari apa yang diajarkan
guru Bahasa Inggris saya.
49. Saya menghafal banyak kosakata dengan
bantuan kamus untuk mencari kosakata yang
ingin saya ketahui artinya.
50. Saya membandingkan arti dua kata yang
berlawanan agar saya dapat dengan mudah
menghafap suatu kosakata dalam Bahasa
Inggris.
51. Saya mencatat setiap kata yang dituliskan guru
saya di papan tulis.

Terima Kasih

46
The Result of the Try Out

Validity
t-test (ex. Items no. 1)

n1 = 10 n2 = 10
ΣX1 = 33 ΣX2 = 21
ΣX12 =113 ΣX22 =51
(ΣX1)2 = 1089 (ΣX2)2 = 441
Rerata =3.3 Rerata =2.1


⎢∑ X 1 −
2 (∑ X1 ) ⎤ ⎡
2

⎥ + ⎢∑ X 2 −
2 (∑ X2) ⎤
2


⎢⎣ n1 ⎥ ⎢
⎦ ⎣
n2 ⎥⎦ ⎛ 1 1 ⎞
S diff = x⎜⎜ + ⎟⎟
n1 + n2 − 2 ⎝ n1 n2 ⎠

⎡ 1089 ⎤ ⎡ 441⎤
⎢⎣113 − 10 ⎥⎦ + ⎢⎣51 − 10 ⎥⎦ ⎛ 1 1⎞
S diff = x⎜ + ⎟
10 + 10 − 2 ⎝ 10 10 ⎠

⎛ 4.1 + 6.9 ⎞ 2
= ⎜ ⎟x
⎝ 18 ⎠ 10

11 2
= x
18 10

= 0611x0.2

= 0.122

S diff = 0.349

X1 − X 2
t=
S diff

3.3 − 2.1
t=
0.349

1.2
t=
0.349

t = 3.43

47
ANGKET PENELITIAN

Adik-adik yang manis, mohon diisi daftar pertanyaan berikut ini dengan jujur. Sebelum
mengisi, bacalah dengan baik setiap pernyataan di dalam tabel. Apabila ada pernyataan yang
kurang jelas, tanyakan terlebih dahulu dengan Bapak atau Ibu guru, baru kemudian diisi.
Jawaban yang adik-adik berikan tidak akan berpengaruh terhadap nilai rapor adik-adik.
Berikan jawaban dengan memberikan tanda silang pada kolom yang paling sesuai dengan cara
belajar adik-adik selama ini.

Nama : …………………………………………………
Kelas : …………………………………………………
Jenis Kelamin : Laki-laki / Perempuan (Coret yang tidak perlu)

KETERANGAN:
SJ : Sangat Jarang
J : Jarang
KK : Kadang-kadang
S : Sering
SS : Sangat Sering

No. Pernyataan SJ J KK S SS
Memory Strategies
1. Saya mengulangi pelajaran Bahasa Inggris di
rumah setiap hari.
2. Saya menonton acara TV yang menggunakan
Bahasa Inggris.
3. Saya mencari rumus dalam membuat kalimat
Bahasa Inggris dengan cara memperhatikan pola-
pola kalimat yang diberikan guru di kelas.
4. Saya menyanyikan lagu-lagu berbahasa Inggris.
5. Saya menulis surat/karangan dalam Bahasa
Inggris.
6. Saya membaca cerita, buku, atau komik Bahasa
Inggris.
7. Saya meniru gaya dan cara berbicara orang
Inggris yang saya tonton di TV.
8. Saya berbicara dalam Bahasa Inggris dengan
keluarga, teman-teman, atau guru.
9. Saya menghafalkan setiap kata baru dalam
Bahasa Inggris yang diberikan guru saya.
10. Saya mencatat kata-kata baru Bahasa Inggris
yang saya dapatkan dari pelajaran di kelas.

48
No. Pernyataan SJ J KK S SS
11. Saya membuat PR Bahasa Inggris di rumah.
12. Saya menghubungkan arti kata-kata baru dalam
Bahasa Inggris dengan gambar agar kata-kata
baru tersebut lebih mudah dihafal.
13. Saya menghafal lagu-lagu Bahasa Inggris.
Compensation Strategies
14. Saya menebak arti dari kata-kata Bahasa Inggris
yang belum saya pahami dengan memperhatikan
bunyinya.
15. Saya menebak arti dari kata-kata baru dalam
Bahasa Inggris dengan memperhatikan gambar
yang menyertai kata-kata tersebut.
16. Saya menggunakan bahasa isyarat dengan
mempergunakan gerakan tangan dan mimik
muka ketika saya mengalami kesulitan ketika
berbicara dalam Bahasa Inggris.
17. Saya berusaha untuk berbicara dalam Bahasa
Inggris apabila yang ditawarkan adalah topik
kesukaan saya.
18. Saya menggunakan kata yang hampir sama
artinya jika saya tidak tahu arti suatu kata dalam
Bahasa Inggris.
19. Saya membuat kata baru jika saya tidak tahu
suatu kata dalam Bahasa Inggris baik dalam
berbicara maupun dalam menulis.
Metacognitive Strategies
20. Saya menghubungkan isi suatu
pembicaraan/bacaan dalam Bahasa Inggris
dengan pengalaman saya sendiri.
21. Saya ingin lancar berkomunikasi dalam Bahasa
Inggris.
22. Saya mencari-cari kesempatan untuk dapat
melatih kemampuan Bahasa Inggris saya.
23. Saya memperhatikan dengan baik ketika
seseorang berbicara dalam Bahasa Inggris.
24. Saya memiliki jadual belajar untuk belajar
Bahasa Inggris.
25. Saya mengikuti kursus Bahasa Inggris di sekolah
ataupun di luar sekolah.
26. Saya memeriksa ulang PR Bahasa Inggris saya
sebelum PR itu dikumpulkan.

49
No. Pernyataan SJ J KK S SS
Affective Strategies
27. Saya bersikap tenang ketika berbicara dalam
Bahasa Inggris.
28. Saya yakin dan percaya diri ketika berbicara
dalam Bahasa Inggris.
29. Saya berani berbicara dalam Bahasa Inggris
walaupun kerapkali salah.
30. Saya mendengarkan lagu-lagu berbahasa Inggris
ketika saya belajar Bahasa Inggris di rumah.
31. Saya menyukai pelajaran Bahasa Inggris.
32. Saya menulis cerita/pengalaman saya di buku
harian dalam Bahasa Inggris.
Social Strategies
33. Saya bertanya kepada teman atau kepada guru
Bahasa Ingris saya apabila ada yang kurang saya
pahami.
34. Saya meminta bantuan teman atau guru Bahasa
Inggris saya untuk mengkoreksi ucapan saya
yang salah.
35. Saya menyapa guru Bahasa Inggris saya dalam
Bahasa Inggris.
36. Saya memiliki kelompok belajar khusus untuk
mata palajaran Bahasa inggris.
37. Saya berbicara dalam Bahasa Inggris dengan
teman-teman saya di dalam dan di luar kelas.
38. Saya menonton film berbahasa Inggris untuk
mempelajari budaya orang Inggris.
39. Saya meminta seseorang untuk berbicara pelan
atau mengulanginya lagi jika saya tidak mengerti
suatu kata dalam bahasa Inggris.
Cognitive Strategies
40. Saya menghafal kosakata dan berlatih
menuliskannya agar mudah dihafal.
41. Saya mempelajari arti suatu kata dalam Bahasa
Inggris dengan mengenali mimi muka guru saya
ketika ia sedang menerangkan di kelas.
42. Saya mempelajari rumus tatabahasa agar saya
dapat dengan mudah membuat suatu kalimat
dalam Bahasa Inggris.
43. Saya mencari tahu inti dari apa yang diajarkan
guru Bahasa Inggris saya.

50
No. Pernyataan SJ J KK S SS
44. Saya menghafal banyak kosakata dengan
bantuan kamus untuk mencari kosakata yang
ingin saya ketahui artinya.
45. Saya membandingkan arti dua kata yang
berlawanan agar saya dapat dengan mudah
menghafap suatu kosakata dalam Bahasa Inggris.
46. Saya mencatat setiap kata yang dituliskan guru
saya di papan tulis.

Terima Kasih

51
SURAT PERNYATAAN KEASLIAN SKRIPSI

Saya yang bertanda tangan di bawah ini:


Nama : YAIMIN
NPM : A1B001038
Program Studi : Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris
dengan ini menyatakan bahwa skripsi saya yang berjudul “A Study of English Language
Learning Strategies of Elementary School Pupils at SDN 1 Bengkulu”, adalah benar karya
asli saya dan bebas dari segala bentuk pelanggaran akademik berupa:
1. menjiplak/memplagiat sebagian/seluruh karya orang lain,
2. mengupahkan pembuatan skripsi pada orang lain.
Demikianlah Surat Pernyataan ini saya buat dengan sebenar-benarnya. Jika dikemudian hari
pernyataan saya ini ternyata tidak benar, maka segala sanksi akibat yang ditimbulkan berupa
pembatalan skripsi ini dan lain-lain adalah sepenuhnya tanggung jawab saya sendiri.

Bengkulu, 20 Juni 2006

YAIMIN

52
BIODATA MAHASISWA
ANGKATAN TAHUN 2001

1. Nama : YAIMIN
2. Alamat : Jl. Flamboyan 1 Gg. Palem V No. 49 RT 10
Kel. Kebun Kenanga Kota Bengkulu 38223
Telp. (0736) 341979 / 081539222221
3. Asal Sekolah : SPK Depkes Tuban
4. Jumlah Nilai Ebtanas : 32
5. Tempat/Tanggal Lahir : Bojonegoro, 25 Nopember 1979
6. Jenis Kelamin : Laki-laki
7. Golongan Darah :B
8. Agama : Islam
9. Dosen Pembimbing Akademik : Kasmaini, SS.
10. Alamat :
a. Di Bengkulu

b. Asal
11. Orang Tua
a. Nama Ayah : Sumiran
™ Pekerjaan : Tani
™ Umur : 45 tahun
™ Agama : Islam
™ Jumlah Penghasilan :
™ Alamat : Dsn. Balong RT 20 No 396 Desa Sidodadi
Kec. Sukosewo Kab. Bojonegoro
Jawa Timur - 62181
b. Nama Ibu : Yomi
™ Pekerjaan : Tani
™ Umur : 40 tahun
™ Agama : Islam
™ Jumlah Penghasilan :
™ Alamat : Dsn. Balong RT 20 No 396 Desa Sidodadi
Kec. Sukosewo Kab. Bojonegoro
Jawa Timur 62181

Bengkulu, 20 Juni 2006


Yang bersangkutan,

YAIMIN
NPM A1B001038

53